Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Non removable battery FTW (Score 2) 150

Are you suggesting companies should develop and produce products that they expect only a small minority of the market will have any interest in over products with broader appeal? Ignorance is rife.

If it's not a selling point for most people, it's not as profitable a pursuit as that which is a selling point for most people. This isn't rocket science. As I said, you can still purchase a phone with a replaceable battery so for the few people that want it it's there, but you can't expect them to make an alternate version of every phone just for you and the six other people who care enough to not buy the phone with a built-in battery.

Comment Re:Non removable battery FTW (Score 3, Interesting) 150

I see a lot of people saying they'd prefer a phone with a removable battery. Here's the thing: They exist, you have that option, everyone does and nobody takes it. Phones with removable batteries don't sell very well and that's why you don't see them advertised all over the place nor do you see manufacturers trying to pack in more features when it's not worth the effort for them. I know, everyone wants to believe the lack of removable batteries is so you'll be forced to replace your phone due to a dead battery instead of getting a new battery. I am going to tell you what my S/O who has sold this stuff for the last decade has told me repeatedly: They made a lot more selling extra batteries than they do selling replacement phones, there has been no notable increase in the rate at which people replace phones while we've made the move to non-removable batteries, and it's actually less common that people come in with complaints about their battery now than before as batteries now typically work well for as long as the average consumer uses their phone. It's also worth pointing out that, back when replaceable batteries were common, folks would often complain about the short lifespan of their batteries claiming they were being forced to buy replacements just to keep their phone on for a day at a time.

I know, I've been using the same phone for years, too. I could use a replaceable battery as mine is not holding a charge the way it used to. We are the minority, most folks don't suffer many ill effects from not being able to replace the battery in their phone. This situation is a fluke, and even after this you will only see a very small minority of folks talking about the need for replaceable batteries. The vast majority of consumers don't care about replaceable batteries and wouldn't really benefit from them.

Comment Re: Heals (Score 1) 596

I didn't say only women, I said "most women." The suggestion of "most people" is intended to include "most women," correct? The fact that you somehow interpreted my statement as "women are the only ones who put fashion before safety" is intriguing and rather telling. See how twisting things is stupid and pointless? It twists both ways, every time.

Comment Re: Heals (Score 1, Insightful) 596

Winner: Most foolish statement of the day. If you are choosing to wear footwear that impedes your ability to drive so you can be fashionable, you need to rethink your priorities before you kill someone just so you can look nice. And if youre suggesting most women put fashion before safety, Id suggest youre at least as sexist as anyone I know.

Comment PET is already very recyclable (Score 5, Informative) 75

PET is one of those plastics that's very easy to recycle already, people just don't do it. And I mean really easy to recycle, I make and sell poker chips that are made largely out of recycled bottles (that's PET) and any bad part can simply be ground up and thrown back in the hopper so the material is used again. Obviously there's a little more to recycling used bottles and whatnot, but the point is it's already really easy to recycle PET compared to many other materials. While I understand this isn't the same as nature being able to break it down, I don't understand what the big benefit to this over standard recycling. There is a much larger problem when it comes to recycling and that's the willing participation of the general population. Where I live we get fined for failing to sort recyclables, and people still don't do it. Solving that seems more important if you ask me.

Comment Re:Prepare for hipster onslaught in 3..2.. (Score 1) 542

You have it backwards. It's been a long time since Apple fanbois have come out to defend Apple with anywhere near the zeal MS fanbois attack them with. It's getting a little weird at this point, guys. Look at all the posts here, I see a ton of people talking shit about Apple and everyone who uses them, and then like one post stating some basic facts that suggest Oculus just dropped cross-platform support altogether for other reasons. Or does Linux only run on potatoes?

Don't get me wrong, it's been a decade since I purchased an Apple computer for my home, but MS users go after Apple users non-stop as if their livelihoods depend on it, and nobody seems to notice the Apple crowd decided to sit in smug silence years ago. They laugh at you for making fun of them choosing a brand, when in fact they chose something they like and you're the one judging based on a brand name you think is cool or uncool. Seriously, the joke's not on the Apple users anymore.

As for the Rift not running on Apple computers, does anyone really care? When I was primarily using Apple computers, it was largely because I wasn't gaming. I still use them for work but we all accepted years ago that Windows is the most convenient gaming platform. Sure, you can get as much power out of a Mac and Luckey is just being a dick here, but it is generally less convenient. Real story here: Palmer Luckey is atleast as much of a judgemental dick as anyone you'll meet on the street today.

Comment Re:Let it go already (Score 1) 117

Perhaps you're unaware that going from kindergarten to graduating high school takes thirteen years, and another four for college makes seventeen years, so limiting exposure to programming twenty-thirty years ago would have impacted children who are now entering or are already a part of the work force. Actually, I wouldn't expect to see results from changes to education in less than ten-fifteen years, twenty-thirty seems pretty reasonable. Beyond that, I'm probably not the only one here who was actually growing up then, had a Windows 95 PC, and would've enjoyed dabbling in some BASIC as I was growing bored with HTML but I simply didn't know it existed until I was in high school a few years later and met people who knew more than I did.

Comment Re:I looked at my provider's TOS... (Score 4, Insightful) 56

Did you even read the summary? Overall speed is not the focus. From TFS and TFA:

The AG office suspects that customers who are paying a premium fee for higher internet speeds could be experiencing a disruption to their service due to technical issues brought about by business disputes in these interconnection deals.

It doesn't sound like he's talking about his average speeds. It sounds like he's talking about the targeted throttling of services. For example, I am a Comcast subscriber with an HBO subscription that I pay for through Comcast. As a part of my HBO subscription, I gain access to HBO Go. I have a PS4 HBO Go application. Every time I have tried it, it has failed to work, at all. This is a known issue, and in response to customer complaints Comcast has openly stated that it is a business decision, not a technical one. So, I pay Comcast for something, and they don't allow me to use it.

Sadly, I don't live in New York and Comcast doesn't appear to be a target of these letters. I can't actually speak to the practices of other ISPs as I'm not their customer, but both the article and summary make it pretty clear this isn't a matter of "guaranteed bandwidth." I haven't seen the words written in the article, but this is a net neutrality issue.

Comment Re:It's not just about going to Mars (Score 1) 684

Can you possibly word this differently? It looks to me like you're saying Mars is less suitable because there's no reason to go into space right now? We're not currently getting any raw materials from space, and I haven't heard of any concrete plans to do so profitably, but if you have I'd like any information on it. As far as terraforming is concerned, are you saying we'd try to terraform the moon rather than an actual planet? I'm also unclear as to why the atmosphere of the moon would be a better environment for developing the technology for a colony on another planet. It's true we're unlikely to want to settle on a large scale any planet similar to Mars, but what makes our moon more suitable? Ease of access is all I can figure, but then why leave Earth? Sorry if I misunderstood, but it doesn't look like you're making any real argument here. If you're saying raw resources are the only reason to go to space, that would be a separate argument, though I don't agree with that either.

Comment Re:It's not just about going to Mars (Score 1) 684

Isn't the moon about as similar to Mars as it is Earth? We know we can get to the moon, and even come back from it. Getting to and returning from Mars poses different challenges and would require different technology than we used to reach the moon. The two big requirements I can immediately think of are sustaining life for a significantly longer trip and returning from the surface of Mars. The atmosphere is also very different, the harsh conditions on Mars would serve as a far better test environment for equipment/structure durability and capability. The moon would be an easier starting point than Mars, sure, but that's why Mars would be a more suitable target for developing the technology to go even further.

Comment Article tells us headline is wrong. (Score 2, Interesting) 279


For someone who knows that -- without a doubt -- they will upgrade to whatever new iPhone comes out in a year's time, and they're confident that they'd definitely take out Apple Care, it amounts to a saving of a few dollars over two years.

This is just another pointless article by a hater, he doesn't even agree with himself. It's bait, and not even good bait, he throws a few numbers out there but doesn't show us any actual cost comparison between using the upgrade program Apple offers and, say, paying full retail or taking advantage of other upgrade programs offered by the service providers. Indeed, he even states that you can save money using the program while complaining that you're just sending more to Apple. There's no substance to the article, no facts to back up all of his complaining about the bad upgrade deal. He's probably just sour he's already in a contract and can't dump his outdated phone to take advantage of the new program. This article is just one of the many new additions to the pointless Apple hate on the internet we'll be seeing now that they've announced another upgrade to their mobile product line.

Just a quick disclaimer, since a bunch of you will no doubt label me a fanboy, I use Apple AND Android products, they both have different advantages and disadvantages. I find myself defending Apple products most often though because for some reason there's this strange hate towards them from people who don't use them, as if we should all be that worried about what phone other people are using...

Comment Re:Betteridge's law of headlines says ... no (Score 1) 264

This is especially interesting given the way the consortium addresses the issue of different symbols representing the same character in different parts of East Asia. From

Q: If the character shapes are different in different parts of East Asia, why were the characters unified?

A: The Unicode Standard is designed to encode characters, not glyphs. Even where there are substantial variations in the standard way of writing a character from locale to locale, if the fundamental identity of the character is not in question, then a single character is encoded in Unicode.

Characters, not glyphs. So emoji are characters, while various Asian writing styles are glyphs, I guess. And a couple lines further down in the same answer...

There are occasional instances of unified characters whose typical Chinese glyph and typical Japanese glyph are distinct enough that the Chinese glyph will be unfamiliar to the typical Japanese reader, e.g., U+76F4. To prevent legibility problems for Japanese readers, it is advisable to use a Japanese-style font when presenting Unihan text to Japanese readers.

So if you're Japanese and want to see Japanese characters, you're told to use a Japanese font. But, you'll never be forced to choose between a male and female dancing emoji, you deserve to have BOTH in your character set. Why are emoji more important to Unicode than the Japanese language?

Slashdot Top Deals

No problem is so large it can't be fit in somewhere.